Representatives of president Bashar Assad and Iran should have a seat at talks aimed at halting the bloodshed in Syria, the UK's shadow foreign secretary has said.
Labour's Douglas Alexander claimed it was better for all sides to take part in the new round of talks in Switzerland.
The MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire South said: "It will be a matter of regret if Iran is not at these talks, because on any reckoning, given its heavy responsibility supporting Assad - providing troops, providing weapons - it is a key actor on the Syrian stage.
"Is it better for there to be talks, albeit with genuine and continuing disagreements between the parties, even about what the talks are aiming for, or to have no talks at all?
"The only basis to get that inclusive political settlement is to have talks, often with parties who disagree profoundly, indeed who are trying to kill each other within Syria, which is why what happens on Wednesday is I hope the start of another chapter in the Syrian story."
Yesterday Syrian state media dismissed a report by Russian news agency Interfax that President Assad had told visiting Russian parliamentarians he has no intention of giving up power.
Syria's main political opposition group in exile agreed on Saturday to attend the talks, dubbed Geneva 2, and said that three rebel groups supported the move.
But the fractured National Coalition itself has little influence on the ground in Syria and other major opposition fighter units have rejected its authority and peace talks.
The United Nations hopes the talks will bring about a political transition in the country, and US Secretary of State John Kerry said last week that Syria's future had no place for Mr Assad.
Syria, however, said in a letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon last week that its focus at the conference would be on fighting "terrorism".
Mr Assad reportedly insisted again yesterday he is not prepared to step down despite rebel forces seeking a transitional government.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article